German Race Thread

Martial, you have not posted anything of substance, just speculation and conjecture.

The facts are there in black and white, deal with it

Interesting discussion regarding Michael Schumacher's WDC's.

From what I gather, and I do not wish to distort or misrepresent views, apparently the consensus of opinion is that Michael Schumacher's 7 WDC's are worthless.

Again, I do not wish to misrepresent anyone's genuine view or opinion but it would appear that the criteria for judging the value of a F1 driver's achievement in becoming a WDC is based on any one of the following.

1. The designer
2. The tyre
3. The team mate
4. The team orders
5. An opinion poll

So

1. The designer - MS fails because of Byrne but Vettel is OK because of Newey.
2. The tyre - 3 of MS titles were won on sole supplier tyres
3. The team mate - Name me a driver that would have been a genuine candidate for a F1 seat that could have challenged MS in the same team.
4. Team orders – well if Ferrari employed low quality team mates then team orders would not be needed. Reason 4 directly contradicts reason 3.
5. An opinion poll – So out of 32 WDC's in history we should denounce the achievements of 31 of them because only one of them could be voted top?

On the MS issue, for me, i think you are both to a degree correct.

I see nothing wrong with saying that MS was the greatest driver, there is so much compelling evidence. However i also agree that a number of his WDC's where "manufactured" in that i mean, he had some mechanical advantages over his rivals. Remember guys, it can be both, you can be the greatest driver, and have the greatest advantage.

comment by BWFCCLEGG (U7583)
posted 3 minutes ago
On the MS issue, for me, i think you are both to a degree correct.

I see nothing wrong with saying that MS was the greatest driver, there is so much compelling evidence. However i also agree that a number of his WDC's where "manufactured" in that i mean, he had some mechanical advantages over his rivals. Remember guys, it can be both, you can be the greatest driver, and have the greatest advantage.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

I have no issue with Schumi having a mechanical advantage. All the cars are not the same and have some mechanical advantages or disadvantages.

Therefore, we can look at their performances when they did not have these advantages and make an objective assessment.

You can look at his very first visit to an F1 track and first time driving an F1 car and beating an established driver, you can look at how Bennetton moved heaven and earth to get him and how Jordan tried to block it, you can see what he did with Benetton and what he did with Ferrari.

You can see how he drove in a variety of conditions, you can see how he performed against his team mates and colleagues. If people were honest and not blinkered by hatred or bias, it is clear to see that he is arguably the greatest F1 driver.

His physical, technical and mental abilities in one package is nigh on impossible to find. Funny that martial talked about what happened with Alonso but ignores the manufactured advantage the Renault's had in those title winning years.

But also in defence of MA, and at risk of being accused of poking my nose by the aforementioned, I can't get out of my head the Melbourne incident with Hill, the failed yet worthlessly punished attempt to take out Villienueve, parking his car at Monaco to stop qualifying. Then there is the issue of special tyres, though how much this can be proved is in itself debatable. Add onto this the way the FIA seemed (seem) so biased towards Ferrari. You can understand why people say his titles were manufactured or won by illicit means.
Yes Schumi was a great driver, but should the need any help like this, and I could include in that statement Prost and Senna. We are ALL blinded by personal preferences. I still think Senna was the best despite the above statement.

Yes, I agree some things Schumi did were disgraceful bt he's not the first. Or the last. Ssenna did similar things, Prost had a clause in hiss contract,Alonso tried to blackmail Mclaren, had a team mate. Crash for him to win a race, a victory he still claims, incident at hngaroring with Hamilton, team order gate and rarely got punished unlike schuhmi who got pnished for all those incidents bar the hill one.

People just hold those against him because of his success. I'll never forget what Irvine said when he was interviewed and these 'whims' were brought up about preferential treatment demanded by schumi and he called it BS and he is not one to mince his words.

comment by WTCBU (U13662)
posted 1 day, 9 hours ago
Interesting discussion regarding Michael Schumacher's WDC's.

From what I gather, and I do not wish to distort or misrepresent views, apparently the consensus of opinion is that Michael Schumacher's 7 WDC's are worthless.

Again, I do not wish to misrepresent anyone's genuine view or opinion but it would appear that the criteria for judging the value of a F1 driver's achievement in becoming a WDC is based on any one of the following.

1. The designer
2. The tyre
3. The team mate
4. The team orders
5. An opinion poll

So

1. The designer - MS fails because of Byrne but Vettel is OK because of Newey.
2. The tyre - 3 of MS titles were won on sole supplier tyres
3. The team mate - Name me a driver that would have been a genuine candidate for a F1 seat that could have challenged MS in the same team.
4. Team orders – well if Ferrari employed low quality team mates then team orders would not be needed. Reason 4 directly contradicts reason 3.
5. An opinion poll – So out of 32 WDC's in history we should denounce the achievements of 31 of them because only one of them could be voted top?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

when you look at micheal and his standing in the sport and his achievements and to how he is judged in relation to his rivals you cannot overlook the many manufactured unfair advantages he had in relation to those rivals -

the ferrari regime at the time decided to pursue a different route to there direct rivals in putting all there eggs in one basket and focusing purely on one driver and putting all there resources into micheal knowing that the drivers championship would be guaranteed all the time they pursued such a route -
------- not that it is important but it was the ferrari way of doing things at the time and the manufactured advantages they gave him at the time which will prevent him from ever being thought of as the best ever --

comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 20 hours, 16 minutes ago
comment by BWFCCLEGG (U7583)
posted 3 minutes ago
On the MS issue, for me, i think you are both to a degree correct.

I see nothing wrong with saying that MS was the greatest driver, there is so much compelling evidence. However i also agree that a number of his WDC's where "manufactured" in that i mean, he had some mechanical advantages over his rivals. Remember guys, it can be both, you can be the greatest driver, and have the greatest advantage.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

I have no issue with Schumi having a mechanical advantage. All the cars are not the same and have some mechanical advantages or disadvantages.

Therefore, we can look at their performances when they did not have these advantages and make an objective assessment.

You can look at his very first visit to an F1 track and first time driving an F1 car and beating an established driver, you can look at how Bennetton moved heaven and earth to get him and how Jordan tried to block it, you can see what he did with Benetton and what he did with Ferrari.

You can see how he drove in a variety of conditions, you can see how he performed against his team mates and colleagues. If people were honest and not blinkered by hatred or bias, it is clear to see that he is arguably the greatest F1 driver.

His physical, technical and mental abilities in one package is nigh on impossible to find. Funny that martial talked about what happened with Alonso but ignores the manufactured advantage the Renault's had in those title winning years.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
the point i made about renault in 05 and 06 was renault were the first team in micheals era who attempted to copy the ferrari way of doing things -
------- and as we can see they and alonso beat micheal at his own game for those 2 yrs which for me shows shows how manufactured and phoney micheals achievments were at ferrari --
------------- having said that no way will i disrespect him as he obviously was a top driver that fitted into the ferrari philosophy way of motor racing at the time --

comment by go-cellino-go (U6730)
posted 13 hours, 53 minutes ago
But also in defence of MA, and at risk of being accused of poking my nose by the aforementioned, I can't get out of my head the Melbourne incident with Hill, the failed yet worthlessly punished attempt to take out Villienueve, parking his car at Monaco to stop qualifying. Then there is the issue of special tyres, though how much this can be proved is in itself debatable. Add onto this the way the FIA seemed (seem) so biased towards Ferrari. You can understand why people say his titles were manufactured or won by illicit means.
Yes Schumi was a great driver, but should the need any help like this, and I could include in that statement Prost and Senna. We are ALL blinded by personal preferences. I still think Senna was the best despite the above statement.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
got no problem with you talking about motor racing with me -

----- i am not sure if micheal will ever be judged on his few little racing accidents that all drivers have , as you hint in the wider picture he will probably be judged on all the unfair advantages he had over his rivals at the time --

comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 6 hours, 46 minutes ago
Yes, I agree some things Schumi did were disgraceful bt he's not the first. Or the last. Ssenna did similar things, Prost had a clause in hiss contract,Alonso tried to blackmail Mclaren, had a team mate. Crash for him to win a race, a victory he still claims, incident at hngaroring with Hamilton, team order gate and rarely got punished unlike schuhmi who got pnished for all those incidents bar the hill one.

People just hold those against him because of his success. I'll never forget what Irvine said when he was interviewed and these 'whims' were brought up about preferential treatment demanded by schumi and he called it BS and he is not one to mince his words.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

when you look at micheals very few misdemeanors on the track they were not actually that bad -
---------- in reality alot of the related bollox that has been written about micheal has been written on the various internet forums by i suspect english forum members who have never forgiven him for his racing accident with hill at aus 94 which in effect stopped hill from winning the title that year -
----------- bypassing the usual pig ignorant internet forum biggotry against micheal and aus 94 and you are not actually left with very much else to criticize him for --